A filibuster deal, but gridlock remains

  • Article by: Editorial Board , Star Tribune
  • Updated: July 16, 2013 - 6:09 PM

A Senate rules change is still in order.

  • 7
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 7 of 7
ronniereaganJul. 17, 13 6:19 AM

Funny- I didn't see this editorial when Democrats filibustered MORE appointments and judges than the above described GOP. Further- this editorial also fails to mention is that eventually virtually all of the appointments were confirmed. This editorial claims the filibuster is rightly for verbal dissent- well isn't that what actually happened....

4
11
traderbillJul. 17, 13 9:14 AM

While the actions of the Democrats were horrible, they concerned judicial appointments of far right judges with lifetime appointments. The actions of the GOP are designed to prevent Obama from carrying out his duties as President for which he was duly elected...twice! Both sides however, should act like responsible Americans. It doesn't matter whether an appointee is the one you would pick but whether there is any 'factual' reason for their disqualification. Putting that aside, both parties should ban the filibuster on appointments and provide an up or down vote. A nay vote even if defeated is a statement of disapproval. That disapproval should be of the nominee not the one who appointed him/her. I don't know about you but this makes me sick as it removes many good candidates from accepting a nomination for fear of facing months of waiting as Richard Cordray (and others) have been subjected to. Cordray is highly qualified...no one denies that...what they are attempting is to force policies and using him as a pawn. This is despicable.

11
4
ranger1873Jul. 17, 1310:01 AM

“Mr. President, the right to extended debate is more important than the one party who controls Congress and the White House. In these cases the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.” -- Harry Reid, May 18, 2005. I realize that this newspaper's goal is to blindly follow the liberal narrative, but I'd love to see you spin that quote.

6
9
mspshadowJul. 17, 1311:00 AM

ranger1873: " I realize that this newspaper's goal is to blindly follow the liberal narrative, but I'd love to see you spin that quote."...Interestingly, I heard a commentator on what you would consider a "liberal" TV show make the same point, so I'm not sure there's a "liberal narrative." (Not everything is black and white as you perceive.) The fact is that 2005 was 8 years ago and things change.

7
5
mylittleidJul. 17, 1312:30 PM

ranger1873 - Harry Reid had no intention of completely eliminating the filibuster. His proposal was to disallow its use to prevent confirmation of Presidential appointees. This rule change would NOT have applied to legislation or judicial appointees.

5
3
crystalbayJul. 17, 13 1:12 PM

Ranger - you should probably follow the issues you comment on more closely because you jumped to an extreme conclusion on this one. Reid cut a deal in which 7 nominees for unfilled appointments would be confirmed IN ORDER TO AVOID a Senate rule change on filibusters. Basically, he said that he wouldn't change the rules at this time only IF the GOP agreed to confirm those appointments after the GOP stalled out filing the positions for many months. McConnell pleaded with Reid to also promise to never go after the filibuster option but Reid declined. It may still happen if the GOP continues to grossly abuse this tactic, however.

5
3
lawyerguyJul. 17, 13 3:30 PM

Just be aware, once these rules change, if there is a subsequent transition to a more conservative executive and senate the process for appointing conservative nominees will be expedited as well. Something tells me the Strib and most of these commentators won't be so happy when that occurs and will bemoan the "trampling" of other viewpoints.

4
3
  • 1 - 7 of 7

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT